MovieChat Forums > Batman & Robin (1997) Discussion > Was the franchise reinvented too soon?

Was the franchise reinvented too soon?

posted 7 years ago by MickyMac (2945)
1 reply | jump to latest

With Burton and Keaton still fresh in people's minds, the Schumacher films didn't just suffered for straying from Burton's vision but having new Batman actors and new vision coming three years too soon after Returns, perhaps people would be more excepting of a new Batman actor and new look many years after if Keaton had done all four films. Usually prequels/reboots are many years away to the point where the previous films aren't fresh in people's minds, The Amazing Spiderman films were reboots five years after the Raimi films and I think they would've been more excepted if they were made around 2016-17 around the time of Civil War and Homecoming.

[–] TMC-4 (19416) 6 years ago

I think that Warner Bros. back in the '90s saw the Batman franchise in a similar fashion as the James Bond franchise. What I mean is that Warner Bros. would (especially once Joel Schumacher took the directing reigns from Tim Burton) pop a Batman movie out ever two-three years. The movies themselves wouldn't necessarily have any real continuity between one another (in other words, there aren't any "out and out", direct sequels with clear call backs and references to the events from previous entries) and can stand alone. Hence, why Batman's costume always changes and why he always has a different love interest (like the Bond Girls) each movie.

The high turn around of leading actors just like with the Bond series, was an unfortunate by product of this. Except with the Bond franchise, they didn't directly go from Sean Connery to George Lazenby to Roger Moore in a succession of three movies straight. Also, like with the Bond series, the Batman movies seemed to have the mind-set that it had to desperately top each entry. Therefore, every sequel had to be "bigger, flashier, and more ludicrous" than the previous one.